RESUMO
High rates of drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) continue to threaten public health, especially in Eastern Europe. Costs for treating DR-TB are substantially higher than treating drug-susceptible TB, and higher yet if DR-TB services are delivered in hospital. The WHO recommends that multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB be treated using mainly ambulatory care, shown to have non-inferior health outcomes, however, there has been a delay to transition away from hospital-focused MDR-TB care in certain Eastern European countries. Allocative efficiency analyses were conducted for three countries in Eastern Europe, Belarus, the Republic of Moldova, and Romania, to minimise a combination of TB incidence, prevalence, and mortality by 2035. A primary focus of these studies was to determine the health benefits and financial savings that could be realised if DR-TB service delivery shifted from hospital-focused to ambulatory care. Here we provide a comprehensive assessment of findings from these studies to demonstrate the collective benefit of transitioning from hospital-focused to ambulatory TB care, and to address common regional considerations. We highlight that transitioning from hospital-focused to ambulatory TB care could reduce treatment costs by 20% in Romania, 24% in Moldova, and by as much as 40% in Belarus or almost 35 million US dollars across these three countries by 2035 without affecting quality of care. Improved TB outcomes could be achieved, however, without additional spending by reinvesting these savings in higher-impact TB diagnosis and more efficacious DR-TB treatment regimens. We found commonalities in the large portion of TB cases treated in hospital across these three regional countries, and similar obstacles to transitioning to ambulatory care. National governments in the Eastern European region should examine barriers delaying adoption of ambulatory DR-TB care and consider lost opportunities caused by delays in switching to more efficient treatment modes.
RESUMO
We report on two teenage girls presenting following significant paracetamol overdoses (>28 g paracetamol). Both presented within 4 h of the overdose and both were treated with N-acetylcysteine, in accordance with the National Poisons Information Service protocol. Within 8 h of presentation both had developed significant hypokalaemia with serum potassium concentrations <3.0 mmol/L and were treated with intravenous potassium chloride. Potassium concentrations returned to within reference limits (>3.5 mmol/L) after commencing potassium chloride supplementation. An audit of potassium concentrations in 254 patients presenting with significant paracetamol overdose (paracetamol >0.5 mmol/L) admitted through four A&E departments in the West of Scotland showed a significant decline in mean serum potassium from 3.9 mmol/L on admission to 3.6 mmol/L (P = <0.001) over the next 36 h. The mechanism for this hypokalaemia in these two individuals is unclear, however regular monitoring of potassium is advocated in such patients during their initial treatment.
